Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday March 05 2018, @05:59PM   Printer-friendly
from the more-you-tighten-your-grip dept.

Turkey, positioned geopgraphically on the edge of Europe and politically inside of NATO, has been heading in a troubling direction for some time in regards to speech. Crackdowns on dissent and even open speech are increasing and Internet communications are the specific focus of some of the recent actions. Coming up is legislation intended to curb the Internet (WWW) in ways similar to how television and radio have already been limited:

Having already brought Turkey's mainstream media to heel, and made considerable headway in rolling back Turkish democracy, the government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has set its sights on a seemingly innocuous target: a satellite television preacher named Adnan Oktar.

[...] "It is just about control," said Kerem Altiparmak, a human rights and media lawyer. "Considering what has been happening in Turkey, I have no doubt this is a hegemonic power, controlling newspapers, TV and the judiciary, that is now out to control the [I]nternet sector."

All the restrictions are made that much easier through increased use of and dependence on centralized services like Facebook by the remaining opposition.

Source : Erdogan's Next Target as He Restricts Turkey's Democracy: The Internet


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday March 05 2018, @11:52PM (3 children)

    Yep, and this wasn't really a problem for anyone else until he invaded Poland.

    Well, except for the foreigners, the gays, the Jews, the communists and anyone else he either didn't like or wanted to scapegoat who lived in Germany.

    Prison, executions, beatings, confiscation of property, legalized discrimination, forced relocations, etc., don't count as "problems" for you?

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday March 06 2018, @01:18AM (2 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday March 06 2018, @01:18AM (#648280)

    Did you not read my follow-on reply to that? I don't know how many times I have to bitch about this around here, but if this site would let me edit my posts, we wouldn't have this problem.

    Anyway, prison, executions, beatings, etc. are generally internal problems. Do you think they're something a country should be invaded over? If so, then you must necessarily believe the US, China, and Russia should all be invaded, and I don't know who's going to take on that task. You can't force a country to treat its people well without resorting to extreme tactics usually, which normally are only done when things are really completely out of hand, and I can't think of many times when this was actually done. The world didn't do anything about the Nazi death camps until the Nazis forced them to by invading a bunch of countries including Russia; the world didn't do anything at all about the genocide in Rwanda; NATO dropped some bombs during the Balkans War but didn't commit any ground troops; the world didn't do anything about Saddam gassing Kurds and/or Shias; really, when has anyone done anything really significant about another country brutalizing its own people, other than holding some trials after all the damage is done? And how about Turkey today? They've disappeared tons of people and turned into a dictatorship, yet Europe is happy to be allied with them and NATO keeps them as a full member. What exactly do you think should be done there? And what about Myanmar? There's genocide going on there too; should we be invading?

    • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday March 06 2018, @01:51AM

      Did you not read my follow-on reply to that? I don't know how many times I have to bitch about this around here, but if this site would let me edit my posts, we wouldn't have this problem.

      No. I didn't see it until after I posted this comment. I also didn't see the other poster's (who made essentially the same comment I did) comment until after I finished mine.

      I wasn't trying to beat a dead horse, it was just poor timing. If that happens again (at least with me), I won't be offended if you just ignore me.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday March 06 2018, @01:59AM

      Anyway, prison, executions, beatings, etc. are generally internal problems. Do you think they're something a country should be invaded over? If so, then you must necessarily believe the US, China, and Russia should all be invaded, and I don't know who's going to take on that task. You can't force a country to treat its people well without resorting to extreme tactics usually,

      I didn't say that I thought Germany (or anyone else) should be invaded for that sort of thing, although certainly there should be harsh words, perhaps embargoes/sanctions and other diplomatic pressure from those with a conscience.

      But you explicitly said that there were "no problems" before the invasion of Poland. Leaving Czechoslovakia aside, I'd say that those were definitely problems. Are you of the opinion that whatever a government does to its citizens is just fine? Or were you just imprecise?

      If not, can I assume your response to hearing about that sort of thing would be something like "Boy howdy! That's great! How many did you kill this week? Good for you!"?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr